A well-known old-car website recently featured the unibody Ford pickup in its daily blog, and those issues ended being discussed by those who commented. It seems all of them were true, as people posted tales of body flex when burdened with a heavy load that led to door malfunctions, cracking, etc., along with tales of rust problems. The styling was, though, universally admired. Apparently the seperate-box model was rushed into production to address some of those issues, and the box was the same one used in the previous generation, which explains the lack of styling continuity.

Today's online New York Times features an original owner '76 diesel with over 250,000 miles. Interesting article, but lacking details on maintenance and repairs that I wish had been included. Check it out...

I remember someone calling the Chevette a mechanical cockroach. Seems there were several still around up until maybe 10 years ago - then they all suddenly disappeared. I know there's still one in the area, and an early one no less.

Fun article, what a color for that thing. Seeing as the owner appears to be very careful and by-the-book, it might not have suffered many failures over the years (not a lot to break), but the recommended maintenance has probably consumed some money over 37 years.

One thing going for the Chevette was good rust proofing for that class of car, and the period. It was much better than the Vega, Pinto and the Japanese econoboxes of the '70s in this regard. This is one reason why Chevettes outlasted some of the other subcompacts. Another reason is that, unlike the Vega, for example, the Chevette, basic as it was, had no major design weaknesses, at least that I know of.

One thing going for the Chevette was good rust proofing for that class of car, and the period. It was much better than the Vega, Pinto and the Japanese econoboxes of the '70s in this regard, due to greater use of galvanized steel. This is one reason why Chevettes outlasted some of the other subcompacts, at least in areas where rust is a problem. Another reason is that, unlike the Vega, for example, the Chevette, basic as it was, had no major design weaknesses, at least that I know of. I'm not suggesting that the Chevette was a paragon of durability, just that the body was more durable than that of most of its rivals.

Another reason is that, unlike the Vega, for example, the Chevette, basic as it was, had no major design weaknesses, at least that I know of.

I think brakes might have been a weak spot in the Chevette, but I'm not positive. Most of the other issues I've heard of were relatively minor...squeaks, rattles, oil leaks, etc. Things that might be annoying, but wouldn't cripple the car (unless you let the oil run dry). And, things that could be attributable to most cars of that period, anyway.

When I married my wife, she drove a 1978 Chevette 4-door, 5-speed. It had eleven hard midwestern winters on it, although it still looked okay. However, it smelled like gas inside and eventually one of the shocks (struts) went through the shock tower up front--common on those cars as they got old.

I bought her a new '90 Corsica 5-speed and the night we picked it up, I hadn't seen her happier...come to think of it, not sure when I next saw her so happy! She drove it three years or so, then I got it while she got a new Caprice Classic. I drove it 'til fall of '96 when it had 108k miles and I 'treated' myself to a new 4-door 5-speed Cavalier. The Corsica never spent a single night in a garage. It was a good car.

Speaking of Tempos, I saw a Topaz today at the gas station in decent shape actually. IT's funny bewcause I see more Tempos than the early 90s Escorts. Those are almost all gone and I actually liked their styling before they rounded them off in late 90s.

You know, now that I think of it, the early 90s Escorts are mostly gone here, too. I still see a later Tempo here and there, but can't recall the last time I saw a Topaz. And the pre-91 Escorts, can't recall the last time I saw one.

But I did see something odd tonight - a Lancia Scorpion - in the rain! Probably not a good idea.

Those T-Birds attract an older sedate driver, probably many well cared for, just watch out for the 3.8. I remember at the end of the 90s, classified ads for those would tout their supposed collectibility.

The 3.8 was most problematic in the FWD Ford products, and less so in the RWD ones. The main reason for the problems, usually head gaskets, is that it's a tight fit for the 90 degree angle 3.8 in the FWD cars. That restricts air circulation, thereby restricting cooling. This condition also caused premature transmission failures in FWD 3.8s.

It wasn't so much the cooling problems. The biggest reason was the iron block combined with aluminum heads. They expand at different rates and the gasket fails.

Yes, the FWD products had more issues, but honestly I think just because there were many more sold (Taurus, Sable, Continental, Windstar) than the RWD models. Ask any Ford mechanic they will tell you the RWD cars (Tbird, Cougar) fail as well.

I actually put more miles on the Cavalier--129.6K miles. Both it and the Corsica still had cold air, neither had had the 'you'll have to replace the intake manifold gasket' issue (neither did my '02 Cavalier with 112K). I would actually say the Cavalier was probably a little better than the Corsica. I had the cheapo plastic wheel covers on the Corsica which upwards of 100K miles would fall off easily. The Cavalier had bolt-on covers. I had a smallish area of crazed painted on the Corsica--it was dark grey--and I never had any paint issues whatsoever with either Cavalier, but both had clear coat. But I don't regret that Corsica one bit. There was a good rebate on it at the time too IIRC. It was a four, BTW. The Corsica was a larger, more comfortable car IMO, with better seats and upholstery.

My uncle lost a transmission in a 3.0 Taurus, and my mother lost a head gasket in a 3.8 Taurus (at ~80K miles, maintained regularly). My uncle also had the intake gasket/manifold 3.8 issue in a LeSabre. My mother and brother (he dealt with issues in V6 Sundance Duster/Neon/Lumina) are both Toyota converts now.

I lost a head gasket at 65K ish in my 93 Taurus 3.8. The transmission was still going at 100K when I dumped it. I had a feeling it wouldn't have lasted much longer because at WOT it didn't like to shift into 3rd bouncing the engine off the rev limiter.

My mother had the 3.8 in her 96 Thunderbird and she had that car for 10 years, but only put 45K on it. No head-gasket problems but I think the low mileage helped and by 96 Ford changed something to help the HG problem. That car did like to leak anti-freeze and puked up an entire A/C system.

I still remember when my Stepdad got that car for her. We were at the dealer and they had two 96 leftovers in January 97. One was a gorgeous dark blue 4.6, and a Pacific Green 3.8. There wasn't much price difference between the two and he told the dealer he would be back. In the car on the way home I told him to get the 4.6. When he went back he got her the 3.8 thinking she didn't need the extra power.

I remember my mom's Taurus (also a 93) started making sloshing sounds - like something had leaked behind the dash. Maybe a heater core issue too? I don't remember any smells though. But by then, it was near its end. She dumped it when the engine failed. Kind of sad, as the car was pretty trouble free otherwise. It was white with a blue interior, all the excitement of a fleet car, but it was a GL with power everything, wheels, etc.

I also remember when the transmission in my uncle's 3.0 died - suddenly, only reverse worked. A few days earlier, it was shifting oddly - would stay in gear far too long, kind of like what you describe. Heads up for next time, I guess. He got it fixed, but a few years later it caught fire (!) and was a total loss. He fixed the LeSabre after its intake issues and kept the car, as he likes the engine otherwise.